IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v54y2016icp302-312.html

The effects of a subsidy for grassland protection on livestock numbers, grazing intensity, and herders’ income in inner Mongolia

Author

Listed:
  • Gao, Liping
  • Kinnucan, Henry W.
  • Zhang, Yaoqi
  • Qiao, Guanghua

Abstract

Primary data from 262 pastoral households in Inner Mongolia are analyzed to determine the effects of a subsidy for grassland protection on livestock numbers, grazing intensity, and herders’ income. Econometric models are estimated to determine the effects of the subsidy on each component of the intensity ratio (sheep-equivalent livestock units and grassland). Results suggest the subsidy increased the quantity of grassland controlled by the household. However, the effects on livestock units are mixed, with two of the four studied prefectures (Ordos and Ulanqab) showing a positive response, and two (Hulunbuir and Xilingol) showing a negative response. Inserting the parameter estimates from the livestock, grassland, and income functions into a structural model of grazing intensity, results suggest each 1% increase in subsidy reduces grazing intensity by between 0.168% and 0.532% depending on the prefecture, and increases herders’ income by between 0.144% and 0.670%. By way of comparison, each additional year of education increases herders’ income by 8.7% and reduces grazing intensity by 3.6%. Thus, education is not to be overlooked as a policy tool for achieving conservation goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Gao, Liping & Kinnucan, Henry W. & Zhang, Yaoqi & Qiao, Guanghua, 2016. "The effects of a subsidy for grassland protection on livestock numbers, grazing intensity, and herders’ income in inner Mongolia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 302-312.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:54:y:2016:i:c:p:302-312
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.02.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837716000399
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.02.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marc Nerlove, 1956. "Estimates of the Elasticities of Supply of Selected Agricultural Commodities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 496-509.
    2. repec:aen:journl:ej36-1-07 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Tony Banks, 2001. "Property Rights and the Environment in Pastoral China: Evidence from the Field," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 32(4), pages 717-740, September.
    4. Li, Yingming & Wang, Yi & Schwarze, Reimund, 2014. "Pathways to sustainable grassland development in China: Findings of three case studies," UFZ Discussion Papers 2/2014, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    5. John T. Cuddington & Leila Dagher, 2015. "Estimating Short and Long-Run Demand Elasticities: A Primer with Energy-Sector Applications," The Energy Journal, , vol. 36(1), pages 185-210, January.
    6. Jiang, Hong, 2006. "Decentralization, Ecological Construction, and the Environment in Post-Reform China:: Case Study from Uxin Banner, Inner Mongolia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1907-1921, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shi, Chunjun & Li, Ping & Guo, Jingpeng, 2026. "Balancing grassland ecology and herders’ economic benefits: The impact of Grassland ecological compensation policy in Inner Mongolia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haile, M.G. & Kalkuhl, M., . "Volatility in the international food markets: implications for global agricultural supply and for market and price policy," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 49.
    2. Yunfeng Hu & Batu Nacun, 2018. "An Analysis of Land-Use Change and Grassland Degradation from a Policy Perspective in Inner Mongolia, China, 1990–2015," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Paniagua-Molina, Javier & Solís-Rivera, Luis Ricardo, . "Effect of “Golden Pineapple Innovation” on Costa Rica's Pineapple Exports to U.S. Market: An Econometric Approach," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 8(3).
    4. Russell, Bill & Chowdhury, Rosen Azad, 2013. "Estimating United States Phillips curves with expectations consistent with the statistical process of inflation," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 24-38.
    5. Torok, Steven John, 1982. "International trade in commodities and labor: the case of the importation of Mexican agricultural labor and fresh market winter tomatoes into the US, 1964-1979," ISU General Staff Papers 198201010800008550, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Wenting Wang & Longbao Wei, 2021. "Impacts of agricultural price support policy on price variability and welfare: Evidence from China's soybean market," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(1), pages 3-17, January.
    7. Dushmanitch, V. Y. & Darroch, M. A. G., 1991. "The Impacts Of Monetary Policy On The Maize And Beef Sectors Of South Africa I: Theoretical Foundations And Model Specification," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 30(3), September.
    8. Jiarong Qian & Shoichi Ito & Zhijun Zhao, 2020. "The effect of price support policies on food security and farmers’ income in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(4), pages 1328-1349, October.
    9. German Puga & Kym Anderson, 2025. "What explains changes in grape varietal mixes in Australia's wine regions?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 69(1), pages 121-136, January.
    10. Mekbib G. Haile & Matthias Kalkuhl & Joachim Braun, 2014. "Inter- and intra-seasonal crop acreage response to international food prices and implications of volatility," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(6), pages 693-710, November.
    11. Skold, Karl Durwood, 1989. "The integration of alternative information systems: an application to the Hogs and Pigs report," ISU General Staff Papers 1989010108000010239, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Catherine Hausman, 2012. "Biofuels and Land Use Change: Sugarcane and Soybean Acreage Response in Brazil," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(2), pages 163-187, February.
    13. Franz Wirl, 2024. "Dynamic demand and noncompetitive intertemporal output adjustments: correction and extension," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 32(2), pages 483-505, June.
    14. Sellen, Daniel & Goddard, Ellen & Duff, Stephen, 1997. "Returns from Research and Advertising in the North American Hog and Pork Industry," Economic Analysis of Research and Promotion, March 21-22, 1997, New Orleans, Louisiana 279675, Regional Research Projects > NECC-63: Research Committee on Commodity Promotion.
    15. Jiang, Hong, 2006. "Decentralization, Ecological Construction, and the Environment in Post-Reform China:: Case Study from Uxin Banner, Inner Mongolia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1907-1921, November.
    16. Haile, Mekbib G. & Kalkuhl, Matthias & von Braun, Joachim, 2013. "Short-term global crop acreage response to international food prices and implications of volatility," Discussion Papers 145308, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    17. Stelios Katranidis & Gregory Kordas & Kostas Velentzas, 2003. "Welfare analysis and bootstrapping," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 335-338.
    18. Patel, Khushbu P. & Singh, Narendra & Leua, Alpesh K., 2025. "Assessment of Acreage Response of Chickpea to Price and Non-price Factors in Gujarat, India," Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, vol. 43(4).
    19. Pope, Rulon D. & LaFrance, Jeffrey T. & Just, Richard E., 2011. "Agricultural arbitrage and risk preferences," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 162(1), pages 35-43, May.
    20. Scott Waldron & Colin Brown & Adam M. Komarek, 2014. "The Chinese Cashmere Industry: A Global Value Chain Analysis," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 32(5), pages 589-610, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q11 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Aggregate Supply and Demand Analysis; Prices
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:54:y:2016:i:c:p:302-312. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.